1933 Half-Penny Overdate ??

[nealeffendi]

Question for Fred or Neal,or others,i try not to go down the Rabbit Hole with the Technical side of Hubs/Dies etc,i have enough trouble ID Coins as it is.
Interesting regarding the 1922/1,i read a Book many years ago where the head of the Melb. Mint at the time categorically stated,in writing,that it was not a overdate,bit confusing for the Numismatists at the time that had the Coin sitting in front of them and forking out big £'s to have it photographed.

Could you remember more details? I don't have any reference of such a statement pre '66 and have to wonder on what basis he made such a claim . I do know that Henderson :mafia:  from Canberra made a similar stupid statement back about 1971. Wasn't based on any facts but on the hubris/argumentum ad verecundiam (appeal to authority) that a branch of the Royal Mint couldn't make such a coin (and overlooking dozens of other overdates/inverted letters etc found on other Royal Mint coins).
The first reference to the 22/21 was in a book back only a year or 2 after they were struck so collectors knew about them back then and they were not questioned as valid overdates (lucky buggers must have had aUnc examples).

[Basil]

I did a quick Google and found Walters piece,i think he means "denied by the Royal Mint" ,i read it in a Book back in the 1990's/early 2000's but not sure when it was printed,leave it with me but someone on here may know the reference.

https://numistip.com/view/1922-21_overdate_threepence_1230.html

[fred lever]

Neal and I had a 10 page article printed in CAB June 2016 19-05.
The article was "the last word on the 22/21 threepence".
.
Neal did a lot of research and I carried out some practical workshop testing with number punches and machined "dies" to show exactly how the coin was produced from one only die and noted the die markers that a genuine coin must have.

As Neal says, early collectors knew exactly how the coin came about, that knowledge was ignored and lost.
Then in the 1960's and 1970's complete rubbish was spouted by ignorant clowns in the trade and at the mint with idiotic "proofs" promoting fairy stories. None of these second hand coin salesmen or mint front office snobs had a clue how coins were made and would not listen to the lower class riff raff that did,  "the chaps in the factory".

We posted 14 printed references at the end of the article that are interesting reading.
Even if the article is heavy going, a speed read and pausing at the conclusions is worth while.

If you don't have the CAB article I can email you a PDF.

Cheers, Fred.

[serenitystan]

"GeeZ'' You blokes just cannot stay on the same subject...It's about the 1933/2 overdate half penny. Not personal tangents...

[Basil]

"GeeZ'' You blokes just cannot stay on the same subject...It's about the 1933/2 overdate half penny. Not personal tangents...

My fault but no harm done,interesting discussion with myself having another chore of finding a book i read 20 years ago.

[fred lever]

RE post #59!
Sorry Stan,  you asked a direct question and I missed the post completely.
You mention two coins the 33 1/2d and the 22 3d and the questions are exactly what causes people like Neal and myself to spend hundreds if not thousands of hours of research to answer them.
All of this is part of understanding exactly HOW coins are made and the process of hubbing from a precious master tool a succession of pressings in metal to arrive at coining dies.
All we have now is the evidence of actual coins and arriving at an answer by examining the coins and the disturbances about digits on those coins.
To cut all the crap out and give some simple answers:
The 3d is most likely the ONLY true overdate, where an individual coining die had a number punch directly applied in an attempt to alter the end digit. This did not end well and as you say the two numbers are clear to see.
The 1/2d  is a different deal and like so many other coins shows evidence of operations on hubs where the end digit has been changed. On some coins you never know the hub work was carried out as the digit change is complete and no evidence left.
On some coins you can be suspicious where the end digit is in a wonky position or there are renmants of a previous number.
That's it.
You can examine coins and be very suspicious of all sorts of marks that should not be there around a digit; Basil mentioned a 3d where I swear they have done the same caper as the 22/21, driven a 4 punch over a 3 on a die and left a mess behind for us to wonder about.
That's why people like Briggs, Lever, Effendi et al spend hundreds if not thousands of hours staring at coins under a microscope trying to work out what the hell someone did to leave that mess behind. You have to dive down the rabbit hole to find out what is there. The answers are never that simple and that is why people like me write endless articles in coin magazines detailing research results. The "overdate" angle is fascinating to study and is representative of the struggles in the factory by the workers to create tooling and product to a standard and meet production targets. A side of coin production that most coin collectors don't even think about....oppps i'm back on the personal stuff again, sorry.
There is no single simple reason for a lot of overdates and within a single date there may be several types of attempts that you can detect and discuss.
Sorry again for wandering around Stan.
Fred.

[Unicorn]

Personally I think a lot of very good and informed research comes out through side-tracked discussions, one topic can so easily be lead to another as our minds don't store information under a single standard item method. (Which I guess is why there is a search function in the forum, so that you can search for related posts that might not be under a particularly named thread). All I can say is that I appreciate each and every contribution made by the researchers here, regardless of what topic it's posted under.

[Basil]

Personally I think a lot of very good and informed research comes out through side-tracked discussions, one topic can so easily be lead to another as our minds don't store information under a single standard item method. (Which I guess is why there is a search function in the forum, so that you can search for related posts that might not be under a particularly named thread). All I can say is that I appreciate each and every contribution made by the researchers here, regardless of what topic it's posted under.

Exactly Uni,that's what keeps a Forum bubbling along in its early days,you need a 'AJ' and the like regularly posting to keep them relevant,particularly in their early years.
In the late 90's early 2000's i posted mainly on Stamp Forums and i remember the Mods letting Threads go for pages on Coins/Notes.
At least 2 Oz. Coin Forums have gone bellyup so i post here as much as i can to keep this one going.

[JeffH]

Hear hear!
I see our number of members creeps up regularly but what is important is the number of regulars and amount of activity and interaction. Very rare day that does not have a few posts and sometimes a new post can generate a lot of discussion.
Getting off track can be interesting and, if it goes too far, then we have moderators that will sometimes transfer to a new thread which allows the discussion/debate/argument to continue.

[serenitystan]

RE post #59!
Sorry Stan,  you asked a direct question and I missed the post completely.
You mention two coins the 33 1/2d and the 22 3d and the questions are exactly what causes people like Neal and myself to spend hundreds if not thousands of hours of research to answer them.
All of this is part of understanding exactly HOW coins are made and the process of hubbing from a precious master tool a succession of pressings in metal to arrive at coining dies.
All we have now is the evidence of actual coins and arriving at an answer by examining the coins and the disturbances about digits on those coins.
To cut all the crap out and give some simple answers:
The 3d is most likely the ONLY true overdate, where an individual coining die had a number punch directly applied in an attempt to alter the end digit. This did not end well and as you say the two numbers are clear to see.
The 1/2d  is a different deal and like so many other coins shows evidence of operations on hubs where the end digit has been changed. On some coins you never know the hub work was carried out as the digit change is complete and no evidence left.
On some coins you can be suspicious where the end digit is in a wonky position or there are renmants of a previous number.
That's it.
You can examine coins and be very suspicious of all sorts of marks that should not be there around a digit; Basil mentioned a 3d where I swear they have done the same caper as the 22/21, driven a 4 punch over a 3 on a die and left a mess behind for us to wonder about.
That's why people like Briggs, Lever, Effendi et al spend hundreds if not thousands of hours staring at coins under a microscope trying to work out what the hell someone did to leave that mess behind. You have to dive down the rabbit hole to find out what is there. The answers are never that simple and that is why people like me write endless articles in coin magazines detailing research results. The "overdate" angle is fascinating to study and is representative of the struggles in the factory by the workers to create tooling and product to a standard and meet production targets. A side of coin production that most coin collectors don't even think about....oppps i'm back on the personal stuff again, sorry.
There is no single simple reason for a lot of overdates and within a single date there may be several types of attempts that you can detect and discuss.
Sorry again for wandering around Stan.
Fred.     All good Fred. Keep on researchin mate..i just asked if the 2 was filled with metal,before the 3 was punched...and if it was done to the die or hub...Thats all...Simple...yeah the 2 was filled on the hub.....Great thank you... :yahoo:

[fred lever]

Hi Stan,  
The subtle thing about filling in on a hub was the actual way it was done.
You or I when working on bigger stuff would just grab the welder or oxy, flow in some metal, angle grind it off, and punch in the new digit, grind the bumps off and jobs done!
Back in coin land, the welder or the oxy is kinda too big, so what they did was a succession of pressing jobs in the press.
They would take  a incuse hub (just like the coining die a "negative") and press out on to a new blank hub a relief pattern (just like coin).
That gave then gave them the  date (say 1933)  that poking up above the surface.
Then they would take the angle grinder (i'm kidding here) and carefully flatten out the last digit like a say a 3 and leave the hub blank there.
THEN they would press into another blank hub and press out a incuse hub now with a blank spot where the 3 was.
Then they would grab the number punch, say 4, and drive that into the hub and presto.......a new master  with 1934.
As they were set up specifically for  doing PRESS work and not welding that's how it was done and it was the easiest way at the time.
Of course all the work is on a microscopic level and needed perfection to achieve seamlessly.
What we see is, the not so perfect mess left behind as people honed their skills.

Fred.

[Basil]

For anyone interested i have added 6 more Pics. to my 11-02-20 Post.
I dusted off my self standing Pro. Scope to have another look before storing the Coin.
It clearly shows what looks like the top tip of the 2 poking out of the re-entered 3,so it well maybe a clumsy attempt to obliterate the remains of the 2.

[serenitystan]

Hi Stan,  
The subtle thing about filling in on a hub was the actual way it was done.
You or I when working on bigger stuff would just grab the welder or oxy, flow in some metal, angle grind it off, and punch in the new digit, grind the bumps off and jobs done!
Back in coin land, the welder or the oxy is kinda too big, so what they did was a succession of pressing jobs in the press.
They would take  a incuse hub (just like the coining die a "negative") and press out on to a new blank hub a relief pattern (just like coin).
That gave then gave them the  date (say 1933)  that poking up above the surface.
Then they would take the angle grinder (i'm kidding here) and carefully flatten out the last digit like a say a 3 and leave the hub blank there.
THEN they would press into another blank hub and press out a incuse hub now with a blank spot where the 3 was.
Then they would grab the number punch, say 4, and drive that into the hub and presto.......a new master  with 1934.
As they were set up specifically for  doing PRESS work and not welding that's how it was done and it was the easiest way at the time.
Of course all the work is on a microscopic level and needed perfection to achieve seamlessly.
What we see is, the not so perfect mess left behind as people honed their skills.

Fred.  Hi Fred, Thank you so much for the info. I can imagine how hard it would have been back in the day without all the bells + whistles that they have today...also does anyone on this site have pics of the tools,hubs,punches that they used..Web site,books, etc...

[fred lever]

Basil, Re #54 and extra pics.
The thing I used to have mid brain arguments about are those tip bits sticking out of a 2 or 3 on a "overdate".
In short,  they may be a left overs from a digit change on die or hub, BUT, they may also be a stress line from the end of the digit in the die splintering off the field leaving a further gulley  "spike". Thus a normal digit may have a pointy bit sticking out of it.
The proof of this line of thought is to do what normal people don't do, look at other dates than an overdate for spiky bits.
I should follow this up myself, but the short answer is YES there are dates with spiky bits from worn dies but I have not documented it.
The really glaring example of this is a coin with a die crack from a digit point  to the rim. We have all seen those. That's the mark of a stress leader leaving a visible result!
Fred.

[Basil]

Hi Fred,just throwing it out there,i don't have a firm opinion either way,any chance you could post up Ian McConnelly's  CAB article from 2007, very similar Coin to those posted in this Thread,he left out 3 over 3 which it is but as i said was it a crude attempt to obliterate the top loop of the 2 or for some other reason?

Stan...
There is a Book on the Sydney Mint i read back in the 1960's,lots of Pics. but where to find it these days would be a task but it would still have a 'Dewey'(?) No.

https://www.australian-coins.net/showthread.php?tid=4530&highlight=sydney+mint


This is a Photo of a Royal Mint reducing lathe and a couple of others that don't have tags.







https://www.australian-coins.net/showthread.php?tid=4530&highlight=sydney+mint